I've got an uncle...

who just happens to be a ute fan. He tells me that Taysom's broken leg is "bronco's fault for running Taysom Hill so much, I even really liked Taysom and was hoping he would have a great year" he tells me.



I've also talked to a few BYU fans who hold similar beliefs. I just don't think it's true.



First of all, Taysom Hill is just another average to less than mediocre QB if he is NOT running the ball as much as he was. AS a purely passing QB he probably wouldn't have beat Texas this year, and USU would have just destroyed BYU without HIll's running. He extended drives with his legs which was both impressive and required at times.



Second, pure passing QB's have injuries as well. BYU has created a few of these (bradford comes to mind) and just today we saw one of the better passers in the PAC-12 (Connor Halliday) go down with a "leg fracture" on a passing play..



Believe what you want, but if BYU had any chance of making anything of this season, it was going to depend on T. Hill's legs. It was a rare type tackle that caused a rare injury and overall one of those "stuff" happens type deals.

Taysom hill was in the top 15 in completion percentage against the meat of our schedule when he went down.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

Laquon Treadwell just had the same thing happen to him unfortunately.

I think it is Kyle Whittinham's fault that Taysom got his leg broken because if he had not turned down the BYU job, he would be the head coach at BYU and Taysom wouldn't have broken his leg against USU if Kwhit was the coach, since utah hasn't had any QB injuries with Kwhit as had coach. :whistle:

From dumb to dumber.



It's about percentages and probabilities. Why is CS less at risk that TH? Bc he is playing smart. The problem is ANAE and Hill thought he was invincible and instead of developing a whole football team, they are relying too much on THill.

You need to tell your uncle that unless he can name 5 things than Bronco has done right, then you need not listen to his opinion on anything Bronco. If according to him everything Bronco does is wrong, then your job is easy, that is disregard everything the guy says because he has an irrational bias against him



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

ABYUFAN wrote:
You need to tell your uncle that unless he can name 5 things than Bronco has done right, then you need not listen to his opinion on anything Bronco. If according to him everything Bronco does is wrong, then your job is easy, that is disregard everything the guy says because he has an irrational bias against him



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

Already disregarding everything he has to say concerning BYU or/and utah.

Cougs_Rule wrote:
From dumb to dumber.



It's about percentages and probabilities. Why is CS less at risk that TH? Bc he is playing smart. The problem is ANAE and Hill thought he was invincible and instead of developing a whole football team, they are relying too much on THill.

And he (CS) could still be caught at any time from behind and break his ankle just like T. Hill. Was Hill injured trying to do something crazy or reckless? I don't think so, he was trying to get a few extra yards and there was no real contact, except at his ankle unfortunately. Yes, Hill did take more risk with his body, but that particular play had nothing to do with that.

Taysom Hill was a running back that could throw. He was not a Riley Nelson quarterback with a death wish. Fans need to understand that there is a difference between the two. It was only a matter of time before Nelson went down because he was not built to take the pounding of getting hit all the time. Coupled with his inability to throw, Nelson was a ticking time bomb. Hill, on the other hand, is bigger and stronger. Did running the football so much increase the opportunity for injury? Yes, that is why our starting running back has been injured twice this year alone. If Hill wanted to play running back in the NFL, you could probably find teams that would go be willing to develop him based on body type. With Hill, it was not simply a matter of time before he got injured. It was a football injury that can happen to any quarterback, running back or receiver. People get tackled in football. Sometimes tackling results in season ending injuries that turn a great team into a mediocre team. A prime example of this would be 2001. Our running back goes down. BYU has a quarterback that can run. He does not go down. However, BYU goes from a great team to a team that isn't. Hill got injured. Not only did Hill get injured, multiple starters got injured. HIll simply had the most impact. It's football. Get over it.

Injuries happen. And they are rarely to blame on a coach. Sounds to me like he was just trying to stir the pot with you. ;)

rblack wrote:
Taysom Hill was a running back that could throw. He was not a Riley Nelson quarterback with a death wish. Fans need to understand that there is a difference between the two. It was only a matter of time before Nelson went down because he was not built to take the pounding of getting hit all the time. Coupled with his inability to throw, Nelson was a ticking time bomb. Hill, on the other hand, is bigger and stronger. Did running the football so much increase the opportunity for injury? Yes, that is why our starting running back has been injured twice this year alone. If Hill wanted to play running back in the NFL, you could probably find teams that would go be willing to develop him based on body type. With Hill, it was not simply a matter of time before he got injured. It was a football injury that can happen to any quarterback, running back or receiver. People get tackled in football. Sometimes tackling results in season ending injuries that turn a great team into a mediocre team. A prime example of this would be 2001. Our running back goes down. BYU has a quarterback that can run. He does not go down. However, BYU goes from a great team to a team that isn't. Hill got injured. Not only did Hill get injured, multiple starters got injured. HIll simply had the most impact. It's football. Get over it.

Yet, BYU's best record since the departure of Hall came with Nelson at the helm.



Now, that likely was due to the dominance of the defense, but the fact of the matter is he got it done.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

We won games in spite of having Riley Nelson at qb, not because of it. Yeah, having the #2 defense in the nation had something to do with it.

Gunk wrote:

Taysom Hill was a running back that could throw. He was not a Riley Nelson quarterback with a death wish. Fans need to understand that there is a difference between the two. It was only a matter of time before Nelson went down because he was not built to take the pounding of getting hit all the time. Coupled with his inability to throw, Nelson was a ticking time bomb. Hill, on the other hand, is bigger and stronger. Did running the football so much increase the opportunity for injury? Yes, that is why our starting running back has been injured twice this year alone. If Hill wanted to play running back in the NFL, you could probably find teams that would go be willing to develop him based on body type. With Hill, it was not simply a matter of time before he got injured. It was a football injury that can happen to any quarterback, running back or receiver. People get tackled in football. Sometimes tackling results in season ending injuries that turn a great team into a mediocre team. A prime example of this would be 2001. Our running back goes down. BYU has a quarterback that can run. He does not go down. However, BYU goes from a great team to a team that isn't. Hill got injured. Not only did Hill get injured, multiple starters got injured. HIll simply had the most impact. It's football. Get over it.

Yet, BYU's best record since the departure of Hall came with Nelson at the helm.



Now, that likely was due to the dominance of the defense, but the fact of the matter is he got it done.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

My comment was not a knock of Nelson. I enjoyed watching Nelson play. He had fire and competed every second. However, everyone knew that Nelson was going down sooner or later. He was not built to take the pounding he was taking. Week in and week out, minor injuries were building up with Nelson almost every year. His senior year, the injuries became severe enough that he could no longer function as a quarterback. Hill on the other hand was not constantly hampered by minor injuries. Both injuries that took him out were on fluke plays rather than the build up of the beating he was putting himself through.

rblack wrote:

rblack wrote:
Taysom Hill was a running back that could throw. He was not a Riley Nelson quarterback with a death wish. Fans need to understand that there is a difference between the two. It was only a matter of time before Nelson went down because he was not built to take the pounding of getting hit all the time. Coupled with his inability to throw, Nelson was a ticking time bomb. Hill, on the other hand, is bigger and stronger. Did running the football so much increase the opportunity for injury? Yes, that is why our starting running back has been injured twice this year alone. If Hill wanted to play running back in the NFL, you could probably find teams that would go be willing to develop him based on body type. With Hill, it was not simply a matter of time before he got injured. It was a football injury that can happen to any quarterback, running back or receiver. People get tackled in football. Sometimes tackling results in season ending injuries that turn a great team into a mediocre team. A prime example of this would be 2001. Our running back goes down. BYU has a quarterback that can run. He does not go down. However, BYU goes from a great team to a team that isn't. Hill got injured. Not only did Hill get injured, multiple starters got injured. HIll simply had the most impact. It's football. Get over it.

Yet, BYU's best record since the departure of Hall came with Nelson at the helm.



Now, that likely was due to the dominance of the defense, but the fact of the matter is he got it done.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

My comment was not a knock of Nelson. I enjoyed watching Nelson play. He had fire and competed every second. However, everyone knew that Nelson was going down sooner or later. He was not built to take the pounding he was taking. Week in and week out, minor injuries were building up with Nelson almost every year. His senior year, the injuries became severe enough that he could no longer function as a quarterback. Hill on the other hand was not constantly hampered by minor injuries. Both injuries that took him out were on fluke plays rather than the build up of the beating he was putting himself through.

Nelson did go down. He suffered season ending injuries twice. In the last 5 years we've gone through 8 QBs. All of which except for CS have been injured at one point or another. Season isn't over yet.



Bad OLs combined with offenses that used QBs as battering rams hasn't bode well for BYU lately.



We're chewing through QBs. If I am a D1 QB with hopes of going pro, no way I would pick BYU right now.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

Gunk, let me ask you this. If you are a prospective QB who is known for running the ball as much as passing, where are you going to go? Utah? They battered Travis wilson and called runs as much as BYU was. It's the way college football has gone the last decade. As far as we know, the best QB at BYU for the last 5 years was the dual threat type QB. It gave BYU the best chance to win games which is why the offense was built around that type of QB. Right now, Anae is attempting to use the offense to CS's strengths which obviously doesn't include a lot of running. If Mangum wins the QB spot next year, I don't think Anae is going to have him running a lot.



I'm as nostalgic as anyone for the drop back passing QB days of BYU, but if I'm a dual threat prospect, I'd put BYU high on my list simply because they've shown they can be both flexible and successful with a dual threat QB.

BroncoBot wrote:
Gunk, let me ask you this. If you are a prospective QB who is known for running the ball as much as passing, where are you going to go? Utah? They battered Travis wilson and called runs as much as BYU was. It's the way college football has gone the last decade. As far as we know, the best QB at BYU for the last 5 years was the dual threat type QB. It gave BYU the best chance to win games which is why the offense was built around that type of QB. Right now, Anae is attempting to use the offense to CS's strengths which obviously doesn't include a lot of running. If Mangum wins the QB spot next year, I don't think Anae is going to have him running a lot.



I'm as nostalgic as anyone for the drop back passing QB days of BYU, but if I'm a dual threat prospect, I'd put BYU high on my list simply because they've shown they can be both flexible and successful with a dual threat QB.

.....if BYu has five more dual threat QBs backed up. This running man era is getting old. Its schizophrenic. The probability is much much higher for a running qb to get hurt. I doubt CS gets hurt the remainder of the season. Why? Bc he isn't sacrificing the next play or the next game for one play. Wilson is lucky he isn't a quadriplegic. And if THill even gets to play another down, if he doesn't switch to a passing qb, he will not make it to the pros.

Was Steve Young's evolution toward a passer or a runner? It's really quite obvious folks! II BYU has to rely on THill to run up field, it is a shotty offensive scheme.

The dual threat qb has been a disaster at BYU. Heaps sucked unless the opponent Dline sucked worse (UTEP) than he did, bc otherwise he was running for his life, except he couldn't--and even he didn't get injured. There is no glory in getting injured. Riley didn't care, but he's was too programmed from HS to do otherwise. THill should be smarter, but isn't. Maybe he has now gained wisdom from his suffering.

Mangum is just fine as is any other passing qb recruit. I would have agreed with Gunk, previously, thinking stone head Anae (not stoned head) was incapable of flexibility. But I'll be danged if he hasn't shown the ability to adjust to CS. More than anything bc he gets the critical nature of not losing his only qb option (as proved by the selection of Nacua as the current backup (most certainly a run first pass second option). So, it can be done. BYU can run a pass first offense and win games.

And as for the assertion that Williams being injured twice bc of volume, that's just not accurate. He had the fewest attempts this year than even his frosh year.

Cougs_Rule wrote:



Was Steve Young's evolution toward a passer or a runner? It's really quite obvious folks! II BYU has to rely on THill to run up field, it is a shotty offensive scheme.

The dual threat qb has been a disaster at BYU. Heaps sucked unless the opponent Dline sucked worse (UTEP) than he did, bc otherwise he was running for his life, except he couldn't--and even he didn't get injured. There is no glory in getting injured. Riley didn't care, but he's was too programmed from HS to do otherwise. THill should be smarter, but isn't. Maybe he has now gained wisdom from his suffering.

Mangum is just fine as is any other passing qb recruit. I would have agreed with Gunk, previously, thinking stone head Anae (not stoned head) was incapable of flexibility. But I'll be danged if he hasn't shown the ability to adjust to CS. More than anything bc he gets the critical nature of not losing his only qb option (as proved by the selection of Nacua as the current backup (most certainly a run first pass second option). So, it can be done. BYU can run a pass first offense and win games.

And as for the assertion that Williams being injured twice bc of volume, that's just not accurate. He had the fewest attempts this year than even his frosh year.

I understand what you are saying, but Heaps actually did have to play injured (remember those ribs), and it's been documented that Nelson was injured while playing the drop back passing role, not while running amuck (think o-line issues). Look no further than the #1 completion QB in the nation at WSU for injuries to drop back passing QBs. Now, I'm sure the % is lower for the drop back passing QB, but my point above is that certain guys play better as a dual QB. Do you think that Hill's injury wouldn't have happened if he wasn't running so much? His injury could have happened at any that he was flushed from the pocket, caught from behind and tackled awkwardly (just like Ole Miss' star WR). Nelson and Hill are some of those guys who play better as dual threat and gave BYU the best chance to win games, so I have no problem with them being utilized to their full potential. what I DON'T like is that BYU's o-line is still so porous that injury was bound to happen, dual QB or not.



Also, I would think that Anae actually prefers a passing first QB as evidenced by his best offenses being run by Beck and Hall. Once again, he was simply working with the QBs that gave him the best chance to win, who were dual threat.